Official S754 vs. S939 A64 Thread

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JNav89GT
ok sounds good
My asus and FX combo is flakey after I Modded board and took off spreader so I gotta iron out that combo :(

what you want? Stock speeds on everything? And what benches, 3dmark 2k1, 2k3, and aquamark. What about DoomIII demo1? Oh and I assume default LOD on everything.

thanks

---

Do 200MHz 2-2-2-5 with the memory. Try a 200x10 run, 220x10, and 240x10 in each of the benchmarks below.

Since you have a GT, run both cards at stock GT clocks and use the same driver.

- 3DMark2001 game tests (give compare link)
- Super_Pi 1M
- Pi_Fast
- 3DM2003 game tests and CPU test
- Aquamark game tests and CPU test

Those should be good :)

alright
I'll have to run a ram divider I think though when clocking htt b/c the abit I have is bugged and despite my ram being good for higher mhz, it still won't run it on this board. I think my board is buggy/bad in that respect :(

Sorry Gator. The thread got off topic and I just figured that we were not doing it. I will try and do it today. Might have a problem with the overclock though as my Raptor might not like 240. Will give it a go though.

No locks chunky ?

Yeah, this thread did get a little tense the last page or so :D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by LilGator
That's not S939, that's S754 so it isn't just a processor swap. Have you even seen one (1) 3500+/3800+ clock at 3.2GHz ? Even if it could, it would be thousands of points behind, so it would be pointless...

---

blahhh thousands??? ya right :rolleyes:

maybe 1,000 at best I would guess 500ish


look at phew and opp

only main difference is one is dual channel and one is single both with 1meg of cache.

OPP advantages over Phew

Total points =+138 (37747 vs 37609)
CPU Mhz = +244 (3228 vs 2984)
VC clocks =+20/16 ("789/676" vs 769/661)
FSB mhz =+14 mhz (269 vs 255)
timings =equal (both 2-2-2-5)
Cooling = dual cascades vs mach 1 and LS

main advantage Phew has = dual channel ;)

138 points could be the nature clocks being lower. Seems to me IMO that having a 244 mhz advantage should translate into a large point margin but doesn't seem too. Thus proving DC works even at this level in 3D benching.

I was reffering to OPP's FX and do a swap out to see how much of a drop in score 1mb vs 512kb. I know the 754 won't swap out LOL

eh. sorry bout the foolish comment about the sigs.


@ iboomalot- it doesnt really seem like clockspeed is gonna gain you massive points like with the 9800xt.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by pik-ard v1.1
@ iboomalot- it doesnt really seem like clockspeed is gonna gain you massive points like with the 9800xt.

---

advantages
CPU Mhz = +244
VC clocks =+20/16
memory =+14 mhz @2-2-2-5

all of those are worth points and a heck alot more than 138 points

either way doesn't mean the 3700+ is God clock for clock or better than a FX or NC just shows OPP is a OCing madman and gets anything fast.

Yup, thats an FX53 though, take away half the cache and you're hurting a lot, even if you could get your chip that high :D LOL

Quote:

---

Originally posted by LilGator
That's not S939, that's S754 so it isn't just a processor swap. Have you even seen one (1) 3500+/3800+ clock at 3.2GHz ? Even if it could, it would be thousands of points behind, so it would be pointless...

---

You are 100% correct Gator. Thousands indeed. That's why I say again "YOU WILL NEVER EVER SEE A NEWCASTLE ON THE 2K1 ORB FRONT PAGE". Neither will you see a Duron, Celeron, Non-EE P4, etc...and all for the same reason. NOT ENOUGH CACHE!!!!

I'm so subtle!:ROTF:

You you math lovers out there:

CPU-cache=SLOW!!!:D

Quote:

---

Originally posted by iboomalot
advantages
CPU Mhz = +244
VC clocks =+20/16
memory =+14 mhz @2-2-2-5

all of those are worth points and a heck alot more than 138 points

either way doesn't mean the 3700+ is God clock for clock or better than a FX or NC just shows OPP is a OCing madman and gets anything fast.

---

What do you have against reality?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by StormPC
"YOU WILL NEVER EVER SEE A NEWCASTLE ON THE 2K1 ORB FRONT PAGE".

---

OPP gets his 939 setup done that does 38K and puts in a 3500/3800+ and OC it as far as it can go.

I would put money on it will be in the top 10

***cough video card cough cough +244 mhz cough ***

"Let me just say that it was a tough task to beat pkrew's FX-53 score, with me using a single channel memory system.
The only thing that took me over was the my ATI doing 789/676.

OPP"

outstanding score especially with single channel memory holding you back :toast:

Well, why would opp even consider wasting his money on a 512kb cache 939 socket chip?

he had a 3800+ and I think it clocked to 3.2 or so on his cascade. Probably didn't score well enough for him though. I have it now and it runs 2940mhz in my vapoLS. I'm happy with it and what I payed. I also have an FX53 in another system. Besides benching you can't tell a difference playing games or running apps. Wish I had same mobo, ram, vid cards so I could more directly compare but I don't.

Gator no I dont have any locks. I am using the Chaintech nf150 board.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JNav89GT
he had a 3800+ and I think it clocked to 3.2 or so on his cascade. Probably didn't score well enough for him though. I have it now and it runs 2940mhz in my vapoLS. I'm happy with it and what I payed. I also have an FX53 in another system. Besides benching you can't tell a difference playing games or running apps. Wish I had same mobo, ram, vid cards so I could more directly compare but I don't.

---

I never said a person couldn't be happy with his system with a Newcastle, only that it won't be as fast as his buddy's cheaper S754 at 3D games. When I say Newcastles suck, I mean purely in 3D games compared to the 1MB cache chips. For most purposes you won't realize any difference in today's games because they depend so much on the VC. There will be times however when the screen is more full than others and the system requires more CPU muscle. It is here that you will see the difference between the Newcastle and ClawHammer.

Some people just want "new" and don't require the most for their money. If this is not you then the S754 is STILL the value leader hands down. Going Newcastle is paying more for less. AMD went with 512k because it's better? No, because it's cheaper.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by StormPC
That must be why over 60% of the people poled believe ClawHammer is faster and less than 15% believe in the Easter Bunny as you do.

---

looks like at this rate I will be Easter egg hunting :stick:

if cache was so unnecessary why would they change sockets and move 1mb cache to the high-end FX series and stick the regular chips with 512?

if youre trying to sell something for 800 bucks, its gotta be worth it and apparently AMD thought that 1mb L2 cache was the way to go

Quote:

---

Originally posted by iboomalot
looks like at this rate I will be Easter egg hunting :stick:

---

So how many times did you vote again?:shakes:

Well at least the majority of the XS members voted correctly. Don't hold your breath for that Easter Bunny just yet. He's not coming, no matter how well AMD's advertising and hype causes users to be mislead.

ocmyface

Why is it so simple yet so difficult to grasp for some?:confused:

who knows, but i saw enough of a performance gain just going from tbred to barton to sell me on cache

ocmyface

CH has a single channel ram and slower HT thus thats a hinder which is compensated by more cache.

NC has less cache thats a hinder but has faster HT and dual channel.

so comparing Tbred vs Barton isn't the same thing.

Faster HT ?

I'd like to see a Single-Channel (1x512MB) Barton vs. Dual Channel (2x256MB) Tbred comparison :) Would be interesting...

Faster HT? Yeah and the S939 Newcastle cores also help to repell vampires.:ROTF:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by StormPC
Faster HT? Yeah and the S939 Newcastle cores also help to repell vampires.:ROTF:

---

I thought the latest 754's mobos were designed to 1600MTps HTT whereas the latest 939's mobos were designed to 2000MTps HTT?

hello all , i ve discovered this bench on my favourite french site , it's a very sympathic benchmark , it could be interresting to try it on both cpu.

http://www.opusware.net/mbench.exe

i've done 5061@2866 FSB 260 1:1X11 2,5/2/2/5
3500+ 512 mo ram

Quote:

---

Originally posted by OC Detective
I thought the latest 754's mobos were designed to 1600MTps HTT whereas the latest 939's mobos were designed to 2000MTps HTT?

---

that is correct

probly doesn't make a huge difference but is an improvement.

In Storm's vampire fantasy world 1600 is slower than 2000 but maybe he can't see that ?? ;)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:

---

Originally posted by misteroadster
i've done 5061@2866 FSB 260 1:1X11 2,5/2/2/5
3500+ 512 mo ram

---

interesting benchmark

I got 4539 @2592 FSB 247 1:1x10.5 3/2/3/8
3500+ 1024 OCZ EB ram

see if I can squeeze little more out. system been folding 24/7 and temps reaching 50c during the test limiting my Mhz. Might let her cool down and do a fresh run tomorrow see if I can get 2650-2700 but that PPMD test is kicking my CPU's a$$.